GeneralThis forum is for non-technical general discussion which can include both Linux and non-Linux topics. Have fun!

Notices

Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.

You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!

Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.

Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.

Introduction to Linux - A Hands on Guide

This guide was created as an overview of the Linux Operating System, geared toward new users as an exploration tour and getting started guide, with exercises at the end of each chapter.
For more advanced trainees it can be a desktop reference, and a collection of the base knowledge needed to proceed with system and network administration. This book contains many real life examples derived from the author's experience as a Linux system and network administrator, trainer and consultant. They hope these examples will help you to get a better understanding of the Linux system and that you feel encouraged to try out things on your own.

For the agnostic to be sincere, they must dismiss resolutely either that God is perfect or that he is the origin of life. Otherwise their position that God might exist is a lie, making the agnostic position worse than that of the atheist.

No, the agnostic simply says that he lacks sufficient information to form a belief as to the truth of the matter asserted. There is no "dismissal," only a belief that they lack sufficient information.

You seem to forget that there are three answers to a "'Yes' or 'No'" question, Blue. The third answer is "I don't know."

Despite the title of this thread, I have noticed a distinct lack of ranking of religiousness around these here parts. So, where 0 is "not at all", alpha is "somewhere around the middle" and 57 is "very", could you all rank your religiousness please.

Despite the title of this thread, I have noticed a distinct lack of ranking of religiousness around these here parts. So, where 0 is "not at all", alpha is "somewhere around the middle" and 57 is "very", could you all rank your religiousness please.

I must be around 0,0001. Although I consider myself an atheist, I sympathize with the agnostics in their belief that the existence (or non-existence) of god(s) cannot be proved. Although I don't necessarily agree with them, I think their approach on this is quite healthy and sensible. I also think that if any god(s) existed, no single religion in the world could give an accurate account of he/she/it/them/whatever, and hence, no single religion would be "right"; they simply would be possible views of it.

But beyond that, what I really think about religions is that they're just one of the ways in which the human mind deals with the unknown and gives it a shape. The other -IMO, more accurate- way is the science.

IMHO what it comes down to is this: people mostly care about other people. This doesn't have to be direct; if something was invented/created by somebody, then they can indirectly appreciate that person through their work. IMO the reason people invent deities to explain the unknown is because, generally, we don't like living alone in a mechanistic universe.

People don't like it when someone explains something away with "sh*t happens", or a similarly impersonal argument; they'd rather it be the result of some form of agency that they can identify with on a human level. I think this also explains why various "gods" have many of the same fallacies as we do (even if they aren't explicitly recognized): they're simply a part of our nature, and whether we realize it or not, it's difficult to imagine a force of agency that doesn't have them, deity or otherwise.

IMO the reason people invent deities to explain the unknown is because, generally, we don't like living alone in a mechanistic universe.

Whether we like living alone or not, making up stuff because we can't confront our fears is not the answer. It's deluding ourselves to feel better. It may have a positive effect on some individuals, but it doesn't make it true in any way.

I don't see the universe as "mechanistic" (if I understand it correctly in this context)

If you thought I meant "deterministic", then not quite. All I was trying to say is that most people would prefer that the universe were guided by some kind of intelligent entity in some way rather than a set of mechanical, impersonal laws (or even nothing at all). Deterministic or not, a deity-less universe is (IMO) unappealing to most.

Last edited by MrCode; 01-13-2012 at 04:06 PM.
Reason: quote attributed due to page flip

If you thought I meant "deterministic", then not quite. All I was trying to say is that most people would prefer that the universe were guided by some kind of intelligent entity in some way rather than a set of mechanical, impersonal laws (or even nothing at all). Deterministic or not, a deity-less universe is (IMO) unappealing to most.

I can only speak for myself but I find such a deity-less, self-regulating, relatively unpredictable and immensely complex system that we're yet to understand (better) fascinating.